An encyclopedia for WDW's Magic Kingdom

[Big Disney Fan]

I have this little pet project of mine that I'm doing in my spare time: an unofficial encyclopedia for Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom. It's actually based on a preexisting encyclopedia about Disneyland by Chris Strodder (the cover for which is right here):


The problem is, I have no idea how to go about doing this. I want it to be like the Disneyland encyclopedia, but I'm worried about copying too much from the book. Do you have any ideas what I should do?

[Disney Duster]

Well, something I always do is read something, and then I don't even look at it anymore if I want to make something like it without copying.

If you're worried about making it your own, you should really think of your own ways. Think about what kind of book would you like to read. Think of how you can fit everything in it, make sure you get every last bit, I'm sure you would want a book that had everything the park ever held.

I would think everything that has an official name should of course get a piece in the book. That should be a start, right? And it should be alphabetical order, right, because that's what encyclopedias are, right? You could look at definitions and rules for what encyclopedias are...

You could break the rules, you could choose not to arrange it alphabetically, but you also have to think of what people would expect and what is the easiest, best way, for people to look up the information that they want, and alphabetical happens to be one good way.

And if you get really, really stuck, you could look at the Disneyland Encyclopedia for the parts you wanted help with, and then close the book and don't think of the exact words they used, just write your own words after seeing the kind of thing they did.

[DisneyAnimation88]

With the attractions that are important to you, perhaps you could add a particular memory of them as a sidenote and make the project more personal to yourself and your own experiences.

[Big Disney Fan]

Well, something I always do is read something, and then I don't even look at it anymore if I want to make something like it without copying.

If you're worried about making it your own, you should really think of your own ways. Think about what kind of book would you like to read. Think of how you can fit everything in it, make sure you get every last bit, I'm sure you would want a book that had everything the park ever held.

There is no question that it should be about everything in the park, past and present. However, considering that many of the attractions, as you know, were replicated from Disneyland (and vice-versa), the part on thinking my own ways might be very difficult, especially in the case of, say, Pirates of the Caribbean. True, I can go into a lot of detail on it originally not being intended for Florida, but shouldn't I go into some background on it in California, especially considering what a classic that ride is?

I would think everything that has an official name should of course get a piece in the book. That should be a start, right? And it should be alphabetical order, right, because that's what encyclopedias are, right? You could look at definitions and rules for what encyclopedias are...

You could break the rules, you could choose not to arrange it alphabetically, but you also have to think of what people would expect and what is the easiest, best way, for people to look up the information that they want, and alphabetical happens to be one good way.

And if you get really, really stuck, you could look at the Disneyland Encyclopedia for the parts you wanted help with, and then close the book and don't think of the exact words they used, just write your own words after seeing the kind of thing they did.

Well, there is no doubt that the book will definitely be alphabetized. But actually, the encyclopedia can only help so much, as I said before. And yes, everything's official name will be included, including the ones that changed names (those will have AKA marks next to them).

All I have right now is a big list of all the lands and attractions, past and present alike, a few shows and some odds and ends, as well as lists of all the attractions on opening day and then the additions by decade (1970s through 2010s), all of which are based on identical lists from the Disneyland book. Other than that, I just have a big long list of all the attractions (in the old sleek WDW font, to boot, known as "Florida Project", which I heard is starting to make a sort of comeback for the 40th).

[Super Aurora]

My best suggestion is to ask help from PrincePhillipfan. He's a walking encyclopedia of WDW. He could help you out better than all of us could. He's best bet to get rich information from.

[Big Disney Fan]

My best suggestion is to ask help from PrincePhillipfan. He's a walking encyclopedia of WDW. He could help you out better than all of us could. He's best bet to get rich information from.

Well, I have no way of speaking privately to him. I have no PM or anything of the sort. I can only hope that he will find this on his own.

[Super Aurora]

My best suggestion is to ask help from PrincePhillipfan. He's a walking encyclopedia of WDW. He could help you out better than all of us could. He's best bet to get rich information from.

Well, I have no way of speaking privately to him. I have no PM or anything of the sort. I can only hope that he will find this on his own.

If you have AIM his username is WerecatBoy777

He's online quite a bit.

[Big Disney Fan]

Well, I have no way of speaking privately to him. I have no PM or anything of the sort. I can only hope that he will find this on his own.

If you have AIM his username is WerecatBoy777

He's online quite a bit.

I don't have that either. I'll just have to wait for him to see this.

[Maerj]

Have you watched any of Martin Smith's WDW videos?

http://www.martinsvids.net/

He does these for many Disney attractions and shows how they were made and does a really great job of documenting each attraction. Disney has even contacted him for footage of long gone attractions. He would be your best source. Good luck!

[Big Disney Fan]

Here's a small sample of what the book will contain (based on similar content from the Disneyland encyclopedia):

Major Additions In the 1970s (after Opening Day)
1971:
--Admiral Joe Fowler Riverboat
--Circle-Vision 360 theater
--Flight To the Moon
--Peter Pan's Flight
--20,000 Leagues Under the Sea Submarine Voyage

1972:
--If You Had Wings

1973:
--Plaza Swan Boats
--Pirates of the Caribbean
--Richard F. Irvine Riverboat
--Tom Sawyer Island
--The Walt Disney Story

1974:
--Star Jets

1975:
--Carousel of Progress
--Mission To Mars
--Space Mountain
--WEDway PeopleMover

Major Additions In the 1980s
1980:
--Big Thunder Mountain Railroad

1987:
--Magic Journeys

1988:
--Grandma Duck's Farm
--Mickey Mouse Club Funland
--Mickey's House
--Minnie's Surprise Party

1989:
--Dreamflight

That's just a small sample of what the book will contain.

[Super Aurora]

PrincePhillipFan is busy with theater classes but told me to give you this link that should help you:

http://www.omniluxe.net/wyw/wyw.htm

[Big Disney Fan]

PrincePhillipFan is busy with theater classes but told me to give you this link that should help you:

http://www.omniluxe.net/wyw/wyw.htm

Oh, no question that it will help greatly, but I'm already familiar with it but will use it. Thanks.

But I still might need help.

[Disney Duster]

I don't think you should talk about the California versions of attractions very much at all. I think you should only really mention the original California versions, and perhaps compare the Florida ones to them a little, but you really don't have to do that because the very title of your encyclopedia says its about Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom.

And instead of just using AKA for the different names an attraction was called, I would write something like: (previously known as such and such in this year, and known as such and such in this year)

That's just a suggestion.

[Big Disney Fan]

I don't think you should talk about the California versions of attractions very much at all. I think you should only really mention the original California versions, and perhaps compare the Florida ones to them a little, but you really don't have to do that because the very title of your encyclopedia says its about Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom.

And instead of just using AKA for the different names an attraction was called, I would write something like: (previously known as such and such in this year, and known as such and such in this year)

That's just a suggestion.

Well, I'm using AKAs to help out so that people don't get confused over what was called what time. Some people may not know if a restaurant had a different in the 1980s than in the 2000s, if it did exist. And I think it does help to use the CA attractions to put things into context, don't you think?

Based on that, here's a small sample of some of the writing I'm thinking of for Pirates of the Caribbean (I did get a lot of the information from other resources, but tried to write it out in my own words):

PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN
Location: Adventureland
Chronology: December 15, 1973 - ongoing
History: "Dead men tell no tales!" proclaims a ghostly voice in the haunted caverns of a true Disney classic. When it opened in Disneyland in 1967, the last attraction to be personally overseen by Walt Disney himself, Pirates of the Caribbean was a smash hit, the pinnacle of Imagineering art. The time of its opening was also around the time that earth started to be moved on Walt Disney World.
At the time of the resort's development and construction, the bigwigs at Burbank initially decided against including this attraction in Florida. The reason for this were for some seemingly legitimate concerns, not the least of which were that Florida was right within the general vicinity of the actual Caribbean Islands, where the ride takes place, and that the state itself had historically more than its fair share of buccaneers plying its waters. Thus, the people at Burbank thought that the people who came to Walt Disney World would not be interested in a boat ride through a simulation of the real deal located only a hop, a skip and a jump away. At the same time, however, they also could not leave out an attraction on the scale of Pirates out of the park. It was Marc Davis himself, who had a big hand in creating Pirates, among other things, who spearheaded a new attraction the likes of which would try to outdo Pirates in every respect, in the form of Western River Expedition, a wild and woolly boat ride through the Old West, located in Frontierland, and featuring cowboys and Indians taking the place of Pirates' buccaneers and brigands. As it was to be housed in a huge building that would take up a huge piece of real estate, located on the westernmost edge of Frontierland, at the bend of the Rivers of America. This building where the ride takes place would be decked out like a big Southwestern mesa and be called Thunder Mesa. It would be home to not just Western River, but also pack mule rides, trails along the mountainside to the top to afford views of the park, and a runaway mine train ride around and down the mountain.
But with money dwindling on the building of the resort in general and the park in particular, Roy O. Disney (who assumed Walt's place to get the resort open as a last tribute to his brother) and Marc Davis decided not to open the huge complex with the rest of the park. Instead, it would open as part of "phase one" of the park's existence, meaning it would be open within five years of opening, finishing up in 1976, the year of America's Bicentennial, so Thunder Mesa would have made an ideal fit for that celebration.
But little did anyone at Burbank know that Western River (or Thunder Mesa, for that matter) would never come into being. When Walt Disney World opened in 1971, guests, instead of being happy about any pirates having gone AWOL, actually balked at it. They had known about the ride's existence in Disneyland, either having seen it for themselves there, heard about from those who had or seen it broadcast on the Sunday night Wonderful World of Color television program. Instead of complimenting the Florida park's absence of the ride, guests complained about it.

That's as far as I got, but it should give you an idea of what the book might be like.

[Disney Duster]

Well, that's really great and cool information! But I think it's too much about the previous ride and the ride that almost was. I think you should try to condense that information a little. Like saying, "The popular, classic Pirates of the Caribbean, which had been a classic overseen by Walt himself in Disneyland and a smash hit considered the pinnacle of Disney Imagineering art the day of it's debut there, was once not considered for the park due to real Caribbean Islands nearby and history with pirates there. Marc Davis planned a Western version with cowboys and indians called etc cetera et cetera with et cetera et cetera happening in it, but it was too expensive. When the park opened without the Pirates ride, people complained about it...et cetera et cetera."

That's not the best re-writing of it, but I think you get what I mean. However, if there is no danger of your book getting too long, then you can keep it at the length that you originally wrote it. Just make sure you do not look too much at the words from where you get your information, don't look at the books when you write, just keep the gist of what you remember from it and only look at the words others wrote for exact dates and names, not exact words.

Oh, and I don't think you understood what I was talkinmng about when I said don't use AKA.

Okay, what you are planning on doing is having this, right?;
Name of attraction (AKA called this attraction)

I think you should instead make it like this:
Name of attraction (previously called this attraction in this year)

And if it's had it's name changed a bunch of times:
Name of attraction (previously called this attraction in this year, previously called this attraction in this later year)

et cetera!

The reason is because if you just use "AKA" or "also known as", that's not correct because it isn't still called that by Disney officially, you are using alternate names that are not used anymore, so the phrase "previously known as" is more correct.

Finally, I want to say that you should do all you can to find out information people don't know. If only you could talk to people who officially worked there, if they were okay with you making an unofficial book like that.

[carolinakid]

Peter Pan's Flight wasn't an opening day attraction? I don't doubt you, but it's hard to think Fantasyland opened with just 2 dark rides (Snow White and Mr Toad).

[Big Disney Fan]

Oh, and I don't think you understood what I was talkinmng about when I said don't use AKA.

Okay, what you are planning on doing is having this, right?;
Name of attraction (AKA called this attraction)

I think you should instead make it like this:
Name of attraction (previously called this attraction in this year)

And if it's had it's name changed a bunch of times:
Name of attraction (previously called this attraction in this year, previously called this attraction in this later year)

et cetera!

The reason is because if you just use "AKA" or "also known as", that's not correct because it isn't still called that by Disney officially, you are using alternate names that are not used anymore, so the phrase "previously known as" is more correct.

Finally, I want to say that you should do all you can to find out information people don't know. If only you could talk to people who officially worked there, if they were okay with you making an unofficial book like that.

Well, if I said "previously called X in X" instead "AKA" (or "also known as"), it would get too long. It would make things much, MUCH longer than necessary. More to the point, this style of using AKAs is used in the book on Disneyland.

Peter Pan's Flight wasn't an opening day attraction? I don't doubt you, but it's hard to think Fantasyland opened with just 2 dark rides (Snow White and Mr Toad).

According to the encyclopedia, Disney A-Z, Florida's Peter Pan ride opened on October 3, 1971, two days after the rest of the park.

[Big Disney Fan]

Can anyone tell me what is the opening date for Big Thunder? Some resources say it's September 23, 1980, others say it's November 15 of that year. Which one do I use?

[WonderlandFever]

The September date was the soft opening so I guess you might as well use that